- Other blogs, same writer
- A thread from Catholic.com (more may be added)
- Answering Steve Rudd
- Have these dialogues taken place? Yes.
- Copyright issues on blogposts with shared copyright
- I think I wrote a mistaken word somewhere on youtube - or perhaps not
- What is Expertise? Some Things It is Not.
- It Seems Apocalypse is Explained in a Very Relevant Part
- Dialoguing Mainly with Adversaries
- Why do my Posts Right Here Not Answer YOUR Questio...
Sunday, June 18, 2017
... on Misidentification of Tower of Babel
Some Very Compelling Evidence the Tower of Babel Was Real
3:35 Seriously? Tower of Babel from c. 600 BC = Biblical account?
In 600 BC all the world was no longer just one people and of one tongue. While Nebuchadnezzar II could have been inspired by Nimrod (at one time he tried to get divine honours for himself and commit Daniel to death penalty for refusing that), he is way too late for being the real Nimrod behind the real Tower of Babel.
Far from confirming the Genesis story, this would instead demote it from fact to a fiction set in prehistory which lampoons contemporary fact - all the while also setting composition of Genesis at way too late. A Christian cannot accept this.
The Sticky Clue That Links the Tower of Babel to the Bible
It seems here that people are saying Genesis is a product of the Babylonian captivity.
No. It is very much not. Friedrich Delitzsch was wrong in 1902 and he is still wrong.
"They utilised the tower of Babylon as inspiration for the Tower of Babel story in the Bible."
This means, far from being real old history preserved to Ezra et al. from way before Babylonian captivity, Genesis is a piece of "history fiction" written millennia after the events and in which he (or someone like him in his day) placed parodies of contemporary events and things.
I find it way more likely that Nebuchadnezzar II was inspired from traditions back to Nimrod in his country - or even in an early look at Judaism (well before Daniel converted him!) was inspired by real old history in the Genesis story - but inspired in the wrong way. Emulating the bad guys.
2:22 I have argued that baked bricks and bitumen were there in Göbekli Tepe but were later removed.
The tower of Nebuchadnezzar could be where it was removed to. He could have tried to get luck from his predecessor in Shinar plains (and Neo-Babylonian Empire included Göbekli Tepe / Edessa, or so it looks from the map) and tried to do so by reusing all of the bricks he could find in GT. Which was then covered with sand as to non-brick stone foundations.
Of course, stamps from the time of Nebuchadnezzar II could have been somewhat difficult to add two thousand years after they were originally made, so these stamps could refute this theory.
3:14 The Bible doesn't specifically say the Tower of Babel was never finished. It was the city that was ceased from being built.
I have argued that the Tower of Babel has lately been finished in Cape Canaveral and in Bajkonur, etc. The project was a rocket and good for us, we are using O2 and H2 for rocket fuel.
Nimrod would probably have known explosive qualities of Uranium from pre-Flood wars as reflected in Mahabharata and he would have tried that. Disastrously, especially with all men together around it.